On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 09:37:04AM +0100, Carmelo Amoroso wrote: > Khem, Bernhard > IMO the effort required for merging new stuff (not bug but basically > cleanup, warning and so on) from trunk to nptl branch, is becoming > to huge, and it is not helping us into having a working NPTL branch > getting benefits from this. Guys are putting new changes into trunk > faster than me. > > Indeed we had a lot of problems in the nptl branch due to changes > in signal handling for example (there are still few files that I did > not merge because they caused nptl branch stopping to work). > > At this stage my proposal is to start *now* putting TLS/futexes/NPTL code > into the trunk. This will not impact any architectures. > NPTL is configurable, as well as FUTEXES (used for stdio locking). > We should probably add a config option for enabling TLS (this is currently > hard coded into the tls.h header by defining USE_TLS.
A config option for TLS is a good idea, yes. > We could fix bugs in NPTL code (i.e. signal handling changes) directly > working on trunk. I did not expect any changes into ld.so for TLS. > We need to look carefully at cancellation handling, but this will get > benefit from having all the code into trunk, because there are more guys > looking at this than those using nptl branch. > > I've also a list of suggestions from Peter Mazinger on how to wrap > cancellation handling commonly in NPTL and linuxthreads (yes Peter, > I did not forget ;-) ) > > The current status of the nptl branch is: > > - sh4: working again tested with > - uclibc testsuite > - LTP (running a 2.6.23.17 kernel from STLinux distribution) can you mv libm/sh/fpu/* libm/sh/ > > - arm: as you have told us, some issues using sysv hash > but working with gnu hash (it needs investigation, but it seems > to me not related to code merge) > > - mips: unknown to me. Maybe I brake while merging, even if I did > not touch any arch specific part > > From my side (I mean my uclibc work at ST) I'll release a stable 0.9.30-nptl > based on current nptl branch early next year, but I'll not keep on merging > trunk2branch stuff. > I volunteer my self for starting the opposite: branch2trunk merge now. > > Please comments are welcome. include/sched.h adds __clone, __clone2 unconditionally; needs fixing extra/Configs/Config.in bool "Native POSIX Threading (NPTL) Support" should better read "Native POSIX Thread Library (NPTL) Support" for consistency. ldso.c has some changes that seem to be unneeded (struct stat st; in _dl_get_ready_to_run(), the declaration of was_tls_init_tp_called is not C89, this seems to happen alot in the tls code and needs fixing first). socketcalls.c too mixes declaration and code and needs to be fixed. How do you want to proceed? Can you prepare clean, C89, separate patches for - FUTEXes (with a config knob) - TLS (also with a config knob) _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
